Thursday letters to the editor

Why make families buy corporate welfare?

To the editor:

Why are we creating a large welfare package for corporate America through Medicare and putting the cost on family taxpayers?

Recently, Rep. Dave Camp, R-Midland, used Bill Gates name as an example of why people making more money should pay more for prescription drugs. But, of course, Mr. Gates does not have to worry about paying the first $2,500 of cost.

I just wonder why Mr. Camp did not use Mr. Gates as an example when Congress passed the death tax that saved this man millions of dollars. At the time of the bill, Mr. Gates stated that this was a very bad bill because it would save him millions while making families pay more taxes to make up for what he would save. Why did Mr. Camp not listen to this man?

Now Mr. Camp wants to take a bill that is to help low income older people on their prescription drugs and make it a large welfare program for corporate America. If this bill is passed, it will push everyone who gets a prescription drug program from a company into this Medicare program. This means that corporate America will save millions of dollars by dropping policies, and all American taxpayers will pay for this savings for corporate America.

How can Mr. Camps party take a program for low income older people and turn it into a corporate welfare program that the families will have to pay for? I know the Republican Party gave millions of dollars of tax breaks to the wealthy, which families will have to make up for in taxes, but where does the greed stop and when will the families stop paying for this special class of people.

GARY COOPER

Midland

Coleman residents dont want jail

To the editor:

Please let me use the newspaper to communicate one vital piece of information: Coleman people in no way want the county jail moved here.

I could not believe my eyes when I read on the front page of the MDN that Coleman is requesting that the jail facility be built here. I have no idea who in Coleman our mayor thinks he is speaking for, but it certainly is not me, my family, or any of the Coleman people I have spoken with.

Many of us, including my family, left our paid-for houses in Midland and moved to Coleman to escape the city and its problems. The last thing we want is to have those problems follow us.

As far as this jail ever bringing jobs to Coleman or improving the economy here, our mayor is only kidding himself. The last place on earth jail employees want to live is anywhere near the jail. Why do you think jail and prison employees have unlisted telephone numbers? They do it for the safety of themselves and their families. The typical jail population is hardly Mr. Rogers Neighborhood.

Along with this proposed jail will come fear, danger, problems, pain and a severe decrease in property value. I vote to leave the county jail right exactly where it has been for decades. It is the ideal location  close to the courtrooms, close to the law enforcement departments, and not in a residential area. If the current facility is too small, oh well. Either make do or add on. Since when is going to jail supposed to be like checking into a nice hotel? There is plenty of property between the current jail and the river. If not, we can always find a new home for the Farmers Market. (Farmers make good neighbors.)

To Colemans mayor for coming up with such a bad idea, I say, "Fine. Well see just how happy you are when the jail goes up next door to your grandchildens bedroom window."

Leave our Coleman alone! We love it just the way it is!

DAWN SMITH

Coleman

A response to column on homosexuality

To the editor:

This letter is in response to Chris Stevens article in the Thursday, July 17, edition of the Midland Daily News.

Mr. Stevens journalistic technique follows the method used lately by many conservatives. I like to refer to it as the spin technique because it is an attempt to put a spin on perspective, and point the finger of blame at those who disagree with their viewpoint. The spin technique involves using evasive rhetoric rather than facts, and never really answering any questions or coming to a clear point.

Mr. Stevens article is a good representation of this technique because no where in his article does he support his "moral" viewpoint with facts. Rather than facts, he uses the following examples:

1. He refers to the Bible. A favorite weapon of the self-righteous, the Bible is one religions viewpoint. However respected the Bible is, it is full of inconsistencies. Chosen passages can be used to uplift and enlighten, or they can be wielded as vicious weapons of self-righteousness to demoralize and hurt others.

2. Mr. Stevens states his displeasure of Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholms support of homosexuals. He promotes the notion that because Ms. Granholm is in a position of power one cannot disagree with her. To support his reasoning, he says that Republican Alan Cropsey has voiced strong moral opposition and he "might end up facing his share of mockery." Might is not a word one uses to support a fact. Mr. Stevens could have used, "many people who disagreed with George W. Bush are labeled unpatriotic" as a factual example of what happens when one disagrees with power.

3. Mr. Stevens then suggests debate as a possible venue of opposition, using statistics (number of partners, sexually transmitted diseases, domestic abuse, life expectancy, etc.). He tosses this idea aside stating that such statistics would be ineffective because of the emotional aspect. Since when are these issues confined solely to the homosexual, and do not include the heterosexual as well?

What is a fact is that heterosexuals have never suffered from the visceral hatred historically directed at homosexuals, making them victims of ridicule, discrimination, brutality, and even murder.

Teaching tolerance and diversity are attempts to overcome ignorance, hatred, narrow-mindedness and moral ideology that threaten another individuals right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."